Abstract/Summary

At the July meeting gathering objectives, criteria and results of major technical research projects supporting the creation of digital cultural content programmes was identified as a work item for reporting at the March 18 Washington meeting.  A call was made to meeting participants to provide a brief description of relevant research projects.  A number of responses were received.  This information was supplemented by a cursory exploration of other sources including personal communication, database and web searches.

 A tabular framework identifying important, common facets of digital cultural content programmes was developed to help frame the responses.  Analysis of the responses in the context of the framework revealed the need for significant additional work to fill known gaps and clearly indicated that completing a comprehensive survey was a much larger task than could be accomplished within the available time and resources.

 As a result, this discussion document simply catalogues the responses received in Appendix A and alternate ways of presenting research information in Appendix B and C.  It introduces the tabular framework and examples of sources of information, discusses some findings and observations about the process and results, and offers some discussion points for debate at the March meeting.

 Observations include:

-         The responses to the request for information paints only a partial picture of ongoing research

-         The way research is described and reported varies significantly in various national and continental jurisdictions.  The way we do things differently makes it hard to compile a national or pan-national picture.

-         Research programs appear to be both scholarly (pure research) and empirical (applied)

-         Building a comprehensive picture of ongoing research will require a significant commitment of time and resources

-         A simple, common, method for describing ongoing research by the major research agencies and a commitment to exposing guides or directories of research would be valuable.

 Points for discussion include:

-         Given the resources required and the need for other work, is a survey of research a priority?

-         What constitutes relevant research?

-         Can we identify the applications and utility of such a survey?

-         How should the results of the survey be organized and presented for maximum benefit and reuse?

-         If the work is a priority how can it be accomplished and resourced?

-         If creating a comprehensive, easily accessed picture of relevant research is important is there value in major research agencies adopting a simple, low-cost, common method of describing ongoing research?

-         Is there value in creating a demonstration of a directory/registry/guide to relevant research?

 Introduction

The July 2001 meeting in London identified a number of areas [1] where it was felt that information gathering and sharing would help inform the articulation of further position statements or identify issues for possible further coordinated effort.  One of the key areas of Strategic Policy Research named in London was gathering, objectives, criteria and results of relevant major technical research programmes.  What specifically was meant by this or its application was not well defined but the implicit assumptions were: 1) initiating the compilation of a comprehensive picture of active research internationally, and 2) informing the group meeting in Washington of possible further action to be taken. The implicit potential applications were thought to be reducing duplication of research, identifying gaps, and providing a guidance framework useful for the initiation, scoping, and development of research programmes.

Sources of Information

In addition to the responses to the request for information we explored three other methods: personal communications with known projects,  database searches, and Web-based research. Each of these provided useful information but more importantly an indication of the scope and level of effort required.

Responses to the Request for Information

A number of useful, formatted responses to the request for information were received. They are presented in Appendix A collated but unedited.  These provided clear, consistent information but at the cost of substantial organizational effort to produce.  A simple collation of this information is not optimal for maintenance, further access, dissemination and reuse.

Personal Communication

Communicating with known agencies and individual researchers is productive but labour intensive.   An example of this was discovering the research work being undertaken to build the technical architecture for the National Digital Library for Science and Education in the USA.  A personal communication with a primary researcher produced a soon-to-be-published paper on the architecture and a URL to a second useful source of research information to be mined [ref].

Database Searches

Searching databases of active research efforts produces significant results once one knows where to look.  An example is the database of  the European Commission Information Society Technologies Program (IST) URL:<http://www.cordis.lu/ist/home.html>.   IST is a single, integrated research programme that builds on the convergence of information processing, communications and media technologies managed by the Information Society DG of the European Commission.  Information is available on the numerous research projects via the Projects Page at http://www.cordis.lu/ist/projects.htm

A simple key word web-based search produces dozens of examples of ongoing research.  One is OpenHeritage , a project for providing  core building blocks to support  European digital cultural heritage and to enable the effective access of citizens, professionals and business operators.  http://www.cscaustria.at/projects/oh00.htm

A useful feature of the IST database is for each project there is a standardized fact sheet. See for example the fact sheet for Open Heritage. See  Appendix B or <URL>:http://dbs.cordis.lu/fep-cgi/srchidadb?ACTION=D&SESSION=15132002-2-19&DOC=1&TBL=EN_PROJ&RCN=EP_RCN_A:54340&CALLER=PROJ_IST

Web Searches

Contrasting a structured database search is the systematic analysis of websites. The email thread of one such correspondence illustrates the typical effort needed by both the information provider and researcher to uncover useful information.

"This turned out to be a harder request than I realized.  We do have information on funded projects on our Web site, but it is not the easiest thing in the world to find or to narrow the list to particular topics… It does not separate research from demonstration projects.  At the same time, we have funded projects under other categories, …. That are not designated as research projects, but that would be of interest in this discussion…. I think if you want a list of the relevant research projects we have funded, we will have to develop that." [2]

A similar example is the website of DLIB2, a USA National Science Foundation initiative supporting research in a variety of digital library projects both nationally  http://www.dli2.nsf.gov/newdli2site/projects.html and internationally http://www.dli2.nsf.gov/newdli2site/intl.html. While comprehensive it too presents difficulties with the discovery and extraction of information.

Context for a Research Framework

In order to provide context or framing mechanism to assist with organizing and analysis we reviewed  technical architectures (3, 4),  whitepapers (5), program overviews (6), and descriptions of projects and initiatives  (Appendix B). A number of common issues and related activities emerged that we have shown in Table 1.   

Together these provide an indication of the key facets of Digital Cultural Content Creation initiatives and their related issues.  Not all of these relate specifically to the act of creation of content but seem to surface consistently as necessary overall.

This framework  is a useful indicator of potential areas of research and may also be helpful in organizing policy positions, guidelines for best practices, and technical standards for presentation and analysis.

Table 1

 Types of Research

Research falls roughly into two categories: Scholarly or pure research and Empirical or applied research.   We considered scholarly research to be research focused on addressing a particular problem space independent of any specific end-use application. It may have general applicability.  Empirical research is viewed as work undertaken in the context of a particular application where specific problems are addressed in order to provide a solution to specific project needs. Both produce important work but there may be some value in distinguishing between them in the survey.

Discussion

The research exercise produced a number of important outcomes and observations leading to a set of discussion points.

Observations

First, the response to the request for information paints only a partial picture of ongoing research. Filling those gaps will require a concerted effort that exceeds the time and resources available.

 Second, the way research is described and reported varies significantly in various national and continental jurisdictions.  The way we do things differently makes it hard to compile a national or pan-national picture.

 Third, building a comprehensive picture of ongoing research will require a significant commitment of time and resources.  Is this valuable, priority work to be doing?

 Fourth, a common, simple method for describing ongoing research by the major research agencies could be valuable.   The IST fact sheets and their availability from a searchable database makes for consistent, easily accessed information.  A common pan-national research project factsheet would be enormously useful particularly in combination with easy-to-locate searchable directories.

 Fifth, how should the results of the survey be organized and presented for maximum benefit and reuse? The three appendices show varying ways of presenting information.  Each has its strengths and weaknesses. What is ultimately the most useful?

Points for discussion include:

-         Given the resources required and the need for other work, is a survey of research a priority work item to pursue?

-         Can we identify the applications and utility of such a survey?

-         What constitutes relevant research?

-         How should the results of the survey be organized and presented for maximum benefit and reuse?

-         If the work is a priority how can it be accomplished and resourced?

-         If creating a comprehensive, easily accessed picture of relevant research is important is there value in major research agencies adopting a simple, low-cost,  common method of describing ongoing research ?

-         Is there value in creating a demonstration of a directory/registry/guide to relevant research?

Notes and References

 [1] Action items from the Tate 2001 meeting.

URL: http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/interop-focus/activities/events/digitisation-strategies/outcomes/actions.html

[2] Personal communication

[3] The DNER Technical Architecture: Scoping the information environment. Andy Powell, Liz Lyon. UKOLN. May 2001 <URL>: http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/distributed-systems/dner/arch/dner-arch.html

[4] Core Services in the Architecture of the National Digital Library for Science Education (NSDL)  Carl Lagoze (ed.), Walter Hoen, David Millman, James Allan, Sergio Guzman-Lara, Tom Kalt, William Arms, Stoney Gan, Diane Hillman, Christopher Ingram, Dean Krafft, Richard Marisa, Jon Phipps, John Saylor, Carol Terizzi. To appear in JCDL 2002, Portland Oregon, USA.

[5] Digicult Report <URL>: http://www.salzburgresearch.at/fbi/digicult/results/english/

[6] Department of Canadian Heritage Canadian culture online programme tomorrow starts today <URL>: http://www.pch.gc.ca/tomorrowstartstoday/

Appendix A

Catalogue of Responses to the Request for Information on Active Research Projects

1. OCLC Research Response: Technical Research for Online Cultural Heritage Resources. Lorcan Dempsey, VP, Research, OCLC

http://www.oclc.org/research/staff/dempsey/

 OCLC Research -- Metadata for Digital Preservation: The OCLC/RLG Preservation Metadata Working Group brings together an international group of experts, from a variety of institutional backgrounds, to examine issues and facilitate consensus in the development and implementation of metadata to support digital preservation processes. The results of the Working Group's activities are intended to guide and inform current and future

digital preservation initiatives.

URL: http://www.oclc.org/research/pmwg/

 OCLC Research -- Knowledge Organization: Researching and prototyping effective information organizing techniques that use classification systems, controlled vocabularies, and other subject access systems. Currently investigating techniques for associating controlled vocabularies with the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC).

URL: http://staff.oclc.org/~vizine/kor/index.htm

 OCLC Research - Special collections: Aimed at understanding the nature of special and archival collections. Conducted interviews of people responsible for 21 collections drawn from university and state archives, libraries, museums, historical societies, and specialized institutes. They included a variety of materials, from books and manuscripts to art works and archaeological materials. Data collected has contributed toward a greater understanding of factors affecting collection and access policy, the role of preservation and digitization in collection development, the rich range of materials included, variations in the types of description formats used, and types of record management support found to be most appropriate.

URL: http://researchserver1.dev.oclc.org/Normore/public/rd/index.html

 OCLC Research -- Automated Classification: Explores the adaptation of standard library classification schemes for automated classification. Focuses on classifying web resources; the roles of indexes, topic maps, and subject browsing; and the usefulness of automated systems for creating minimal metadata records and in Webmaster toolkits.

URL: http://staff.oclc.org/~godby/auto_class/auto.html

 DCMI - Dublin Core Metadata Initiative. Provides umbrella under which the Dublin Core Metadata Element Set is being defined.

2. JISC: Technical Research and related activities

  Digital preservation

The JISC Digital Preservation Focus was established in June 2000. Its role is as follows:

Developing a long-term retention strategy for digital materials of relevance to HE/FE institutions in the UK; providing a UK focus for the development of practices, policies and strategies for the preservation of digital materials; generating support and collaborative funding from and promoting inter-working with appropriate agencies worldwide.

The Digital Preservation Focus has initiated the setting up of the Digital Preservation Coalition
This was established in 2001 to foster joint action to address the urgent challenges of securing the preservation of digital resources in the UK and to work with others internationally to secure our global digital memory and knowledge base. We believe digital preservation will be fundamental to the National Learning Networks, the preservation of contemporary cultural heritage, and the recording of research and development for the benefit of our industries and society. It is therefore an essential component in securing the knowledge base of the UK and its global partners.

More information about this activity is available at: http://www.jisc.ac.uk/dner/preservation/

Content creation

The JISC does not currently have large-scale digitisation programme underway, though over the years it has sponsored a number of digitisation initiatives. Its broad approach to digitisation tends to be strategic in order to fill gaps in its national digital collections strategy. The strategy is available at: http://www.jisc.ac.uk/dner/collections/strategy.htm

Approaches to content acquisition for the higher and further education community are threefold, through licensing access to third party resources, brokering access through inclusion of metadata in portals and other resource discovery services, encouraging deposit of digital resources with centrally funded archives, and finally digitisation where appropriate. The JISC aims through these methods to develop comprehensive coverage across all curriculum areas, and in the following formats in order to serve the needs of the higher and further education community: e-books, journals, geospatial data, primary research data, discovery tools, time based media, images, learning materials.

However it is worthy of note that content creation (i.e. digitisation) activity is however underway in the following areas:
 

Learning materials and resources (images, timebased media, databases, and learning objects). As part of the DNER Learning and Teaching Programme, see:
http://www.jisc.ac.uk/dner/development/programmes/learnteach.html

Digitisation or encoding of time based media resources and related metadata and accompanying materials is also taking place on a national basis on behalf of higher and further education. Ten film and sound collections are currently being encoded. This work is being carried out by the MAAS (Managing Agent and Advisory Service for Moving Pictures and Sound: http://www.bufvc.ac.uk/maas

Information Environment

The JISC has recently published a draft Information Environment development strategy. This is a very significant strand of work, and carries a high level of investment on the part of the JISC. It has a research and development aspect as well as component which is developing service provision based on more tested approaches. This Information Environment must be fit to serve the needs of students, teachers and researchers in further and higher education into the future. The development of a robust and appropriate platform to provide access for educational content for learning, teaching and research purposes is a key component of the JISC 5 year strategy to: "build an on-line information environment providing secure and convenient access to a comprehensive collection of scholarly and educational material".

This document is available at: http://www.jisc.ac.uk/dner/development/IEstrategy.html

This strategy provides the context for the information presented in the headings in this section.

Technical standards
 

The JISC has developed a set of standards and guidelines for content creators, and providers of network services who wish to interact seamlessly within the UK information environment. These are currently being updated to reach their second iteration. These are available at:

http://www.jisc.ac.uk/dner/development/guidance/DNERStandards.html

Technical  architectures

Much work has taken place to develop the technical architecture to underpin the evolving Information Environment. This work is being carried out in conjunction with UKOLN, DNER Architecture; scoping the Information Environment and is available at
http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/distributed-systems/dner/arch/

Resource discovery

The JISC funds the RDN, Resource Discovery Network. This is a set of subject gateways to enable the HE and FE community to locate high quality Internet resources suitable for learning and teaching and research. The RDN is actively involved in a number of technical research areas, and is currently being funded to develop portals. These portals are to enable cross-searching of relevant content for each subject area, the portals are mainly currently using Z39.50 for this purpose, but are starting to experiment with the use of OAI for this purpose. More is available about these activities at: http://www.portal.ac.uk/spp/ and http://www.rdn.ac.uk/publications/technical/

 Other areas of note are the Behind the Headlines Service using RSS to embed this services in html pages, see http://www.rdn.ac.uk/news/headlines/

and http://www.rdn.ac.uk/news/channels/rdnheadlines.xml (the XML file)

Also WSE: Developing a harvested database of resources for the RDN, http://www.rdn.ac.uk/projects/#wse

 Distributed  searching and Portals

The JISC is funding a portals and fusion programme to address the challenges of how best to provide access to distributed resources and present them to end users. Portals are currently being funded on the basis for, subject (e.g. engineering), format (e.g. geospatial, image) and domain of interest (e.g. learning and teaching). All portals are developing technical approaches to the interoperability of the deep-web, as opposed to shallow linking. More information about the JIISC portals activity can be found in the Information Environment Development Strategy, the DNER Technical Architecture and the RDN website as above. In the future all information about the portals are will be available at: http://www.jisc.ac.uk/dner/development/portals.html, though this is only a holding page at present

Developing Technologies to allow community digital content submission and disclosure (Content Submission/disclosure programme).

The JISC is attempting to develop the Information Environment so that it can be a place where the HE and FE community can disclose, deposit and exchange relevant content. In particular two calls for proposals have just been issued in the UK for the following programmes:

FAIR (Focus on Access to Institutional Resources) Programme http://www.jisc.ac.uk/pub02/c01_02.html The Joint Information Systems Committee (JISC) intends to fund a number of projects to support access to and sharing of institutional content within Higher Education HE) and Further Education (FE) and to allow intelligence to be gathered about the technical, organisational and cultural challenges of these processes. The Focus on Access to Information Resources (FAIR) programme will contribute to developing the mechanisms and supporting services to allow the submission and sharing of content generated by the HE/FE community. This programme is inspired by the vision of the Open Archives Initiative (OAI) (http://www.openarchives.org), that digital resources can be shared between organisations based on a simple mechanism allowing metadata about those resources to be harvested into services.

X4L (Exchange for Learning) Programme
http://www.jisc.ac.uk/pub02/c02_02.html The Joint Information Systems Committee (JISC), intends to fund a number of projects, under the Exchange for Learning Programme (X4L) to explore the re-purposing of existing and forthcoming JISC funded content suitable for use in learning. This programme will contribute to developing the mechanisms and supporting services to allow the submission and sharing of content generated by and of interest to the further education (FE) and higher education (HE) community.  This call has been motivated by the imperative to make the most of the considerable investment that has taken place in a range of content which has high potential value or use in learning. It is clear that there is a need to encourage colleges and universities to actively take a role in defining the kinds of content that would best fit their learning aims, and for national agencies and support services to work to provide the tools and infrastructure to allow this "exchange of learning" to take place.

3. RLG Research Response: Technical Research for Online Cultural Heritage Resources. Tony Gill, Program Officer, RLG

RLG Cultural Materials Initiative

RLG has made the provision of electronic access to cultural materials from its members’ world-class collections a key strategic objective for the opening years of the 21^st Century. An international Alliance of RLG members is working with RLG to create and grow an integrated web-based collection of works and artifacts that document culture and civilization: RLG Cultural Materials.

 Alliance advisory groups provide invaluable consensus-based input on a range of service development issues: The Policy Advisory Group focuses on the terms and conditions for both contributors and various classes of users of the service; the Description Advisory Group works on standards and best practice for the textual descriptions of cultural materials; the Surrogate Advisory Group makes recommendations on the quality and format of the multimedia digital surrogates; the User Interface Advisory Group provides ongoing formative evaluation of the service's innovative and powerful user interface; and the Content Development Advisory Group will provide guidance on content focus, and assistance in reviewing proposals for grant-funded content development.

 -         RLG Cultural Materials Initiative: http://www.rlg.org/culturalres/

-         RLG Cultural Materials (subscription service): http://culturalmaterials.rlg.org/

-         Advisory Groups: http://www.rlg.org/culturalres/advgroups.html

-         Description Guidelines: http://www.rlg.org/culturalres/descguide.html

-         Surrogate Guidelines: http://www.rlg.org/culturalres/surrogateguide.html

-         RLG Contact: Ricky Erway <Ricky.Erway@notes.rlg.org>

 CIDOC Conceptual Reference Model (CIDOC CRM)

The CIDOC CRM is an object-oriented domain ontology for cultural heritage information; it formally describes the implicit and explicit concepts and relationships relevant to the documentation of cultural collections. RLG is an active supporter and participant in both the CIDOC CRM Special Interest Group and ISO TC46 SC4 WG9, two groups that are working to validate the CIDOC CRM, demonstrate community support and publish the model as an ISO international standard.

 -         CIDOC CRM: http://cidoc.ics.forth.gr/

-         CIDOC CRM SIG: http://cidoc.ics.forth.gr/crm_sig.html

-         ISO TC46 SC4 WG9: http://www.niso.org/international/SC4/sc4wkgroup.html#wg9

-         RLG Contact: Tony Gill <Tony.Gill@notes.rlg.org>

 CIMI

RLG is a founding member of the CIMI Consortium, and an active participant in a number of past and current CIMI activities, particularly those that fall under the Project MIDIIS umbrella such as the CIMI/ Harmony collaboration to evaluate the ABC model's ability to accommodate the semantics required for museum object documentation, the SPECTRUM XML Schema development work and the collection level description survey.

 -         CIMI: http://www.cimi.org/

-         RLG Contact: Tony Gill <Tony.Gill@notes.rlg.org>

 DCMI Libraries Working Group

RLG is a participant in the DCMI Libraries Working Group, which is working to develop a Library Application Profile as part of the wider Dublin Core Metadata Initiative.

 -         http://www.dublincore.org/groups/libraries/

-         RLG Contact: Ricky Erway <Ricky.Erway@notes.rlg.org>

 DELOS Ontology Harmonization

RLG participates as an invited guest in the DELOS Network of Excellence on Digital Libraries: Ontology Harmonization Working Group, funded by the European Commission's IST programme. This group is exploring the potential for harmonization between the CIDOC Conceptual Reference Model and the ABC model developed by the Harmony group, possibly resulting in the development of a combined "superontology."

 -         DELOS: http://www.ercim.org/delos/

-         RLG Contact: Tony Gill <Tony.Gill@notes.rlg.org>

 Digital Archive Attributes Working Group

This international working group, co-chaired by RLG and OCLC, aims to define the key characteristics of reliable digital archiving services for heterogeneous research collections. This work has resulted in a draft document that is being made to the community at large for reaction.

 -         http://www.rlg.org/longterm/attribswg.html

-         RLG Contact: Robin Dale <Robin.Dale@notes.rlg.org>

 EAD  (Encoded Archival Description)

RLG has been involved since the inception of this standard for encoding archival finding aids. RLG participates in the EAD Working Group, the body responsible for the development and maintenance of the standard. The RLG EAD Advisory Group has been tasked with updating the existing RLG Recommended Application Guidelines, bringing these guidelines into compliance with EAD Version 2002. The work of this group is contributing towards shaping standards for base-level application of EAD. These guidelines will help to "raise the bar" for EAD encoding, promoting better document interchange and better baseline standards for archival description. EAD is used in RLG Archival Resources, a service that unites 26,000 finding aids from 140 institutions with 700,000 MARC-AMC records.

 -         EAD homepage:  http://www.loc.gov/ead/

-         RLG & EAD: http://www.rlg.org/primary/faprog.html

-         RLG Archival Resources: http://www.rlg.org/arr

-         RLG Contact: Merrilee Proffitt <Merrilee.Proffitt@notes.rlg.org>

 EAC (Encoded Archival Context)

An ongoing initiative within the international archival community to design and implement a prototype XML standard for encoding descriptions of record creators (identifying record creators, recording the their designations, describing characteristics, dates, etc.)  This encoded creator information will facilitate access to and interpretation of records.  EAC can be seen as an extension of EAD, where EAD encoded finding aids can be enhanced by the information in EAC.

-         http://www.library.yale.edu/eac/

-         RLG Contact: Anne Van Camp <avc@notes.rlg.org>

 METS (Metadata Encoding and Transmission Standard)

The METS schema is a standard for encoding descriptive, administrative, and structural metadata regarding objects within a digital library, expressed using the XML schema language of the World Wide Web Consortium.  While the Library of Congress acts as the "home" for METS, RLG serves as the coordinating body for the METS Editorial Board.  METS offers both a standard means of capturing structural metadata for a digital object, and also provides a mechanism for "wrapping" all other relevant metadata for a digital object so that it can be archived. RLG is actively investigating the utility of METS as both a digital archive information package and as a mechanism for the online display of compound digital objects.

 -         http://www.loc.gov/standards/mets/

-         RLG Contact: Merrilee Proffitt <Merrilee.Proffitt@notes.rlg.org>

 NISO Technical Metadata for Digital Still Images

An RLG staff member co-chairs this NISO standards committee that is working to establish a standard for the technical metadata, information that describes the capture process and technical characteristics, of digital still images. A working draft Data Dictionary was released for comment on 16 February 2001.

 -         http://www.niso.org/committees/committee_au.html

-         RLG Contact: Robin Dale <Robin.Dale@notes.rlg.org>

 OCLC/RLG Preservation Metadata Working Group

The OCLC/RLG Preservation Metadata Working Group was formed in response to the need for consensus and convergence in the development, use and implementation of preservation metadata. The group has drafted a white paper on the use of metadata to support the digital preservation process.

 -         http://www.oclc.org/research/pmwg/

-         RLG Contact: Robin Dale <Robin.Dale@notes.rlg.org>

 Open Archival Information System (OAIS)

RLG participates in the international efforts to standardize and validate the Reference Model for an Open Archival Information System. In addition to participating in international meetings and hosting OAIS web resources and the active oais-implementers mailing list, RLG is currently at the planning stage in the development of a long-term digital repository that will validate the OAIS model.

 -         RLG OAIS Resources: http://www.rlg.org/longterm/oais.html

-         RLG Contact: Robin Dale <Robin.Dale@notes.rlg.org>

SHED (Shared Histories of Exhibitions Database) Taskforce

The SHED Taskforce, an activity of RLG's Art & Architecture Group, is investigating the requirements and demand for a union database of exhibition descriptions in response to a proposal made during the 1999 AAG Annual Meeting.

 -         AAG Current Projects: http://www.rlg.org/aag/index.html#current

-         RLG Contact: Tony Gill <Tony.Gill@notes.rlg.org>

 3D Culture on the Web

RLG maintains an active interest in the use of 3D computer graphics technologies for enhancing access to cultural heritage information, particularly those that utilise the web. This is achieved through an ongoing informal survey of 3D cultural web exhibits and attendance at symposia organized by the Web3D Consortium.

 -         3D Culture on the Web: http://www.rlg.org/preserv/diginews/diginews5-3.html#featured

-         RLG Contact: Tony Gill <Tony.Gill@notes.rlg.org>

Appendix B      

IST Project Fact Sheet

OPENHERITAGE

OpenHeritage: enabling the European Culture Economy

Coordinator

Contact Person:

Name: TARIFFI, Flavio

Tel: +39-057-422373

Fax: +39-057-4404782

Email: flavio.tariffi@spacespa.it            

Organisation:

Space S.p.a.

Viale Vittorio Veneto 31

59100   Prato

ITALY

The project will provide core building blocks to support the European digital cultural heritage and to enable the effective access of citizens, professionals and business operators. An analysis of the scenario of the "cultural economy" leads to a socio-economic model that will leverage technology in balanced and sustainable ways, with the goal of making CH economically self-sustainable and of increasing European competitiveness.

By integrating the multimedia value chain, the project aims at the development and validation of:

1) dynamic models of territorial CH systems;

2) an innovative collections management solution to enhance smaller museums through modular access stations endowed with rich interactive media;

3) territorial infrastructures (Service Centres) for the management and valorisation of local networks of memory institutions;

4) a global portal mixing community areas with b2b services for the trading of rich media

Objectives:

The main objectives of the project are:

- Development of dynamic, computable models of territorial cultural systems to assess and valorise the qualities and strengths of each regional or local cultural system.

- Development through integration of an innovative solution for collections management and user access in memory institutions based on existing systems developed by two of the partners.

- Deployment of Territorial Service Centres supporting memory institutions through facilities management, customer relationship management, storage, promotion and transaction services (a new model of cultural Application Service Provider (ASP)).

- Validation of the model and related technologies and services in significant test beds, through a range of technological and territorial validation activities.

- Launch of a global "openheritage.com" enterprise for the exploitation of the European CH through an advanced portal encompassing both traditional "community" features and b2b areas for the trading of rich media asset

Work description:

The project plans to design, to verify, to implement through adequate enabling technologies and to validate a comprehensive model for the valorisation of the European Cultural Heritage by leveraging sustainable innovation and by exploiting the opportunities offered by the so-called "new economy" with its rapid shift towards the accessibility of user-driven cultural services and "experimential" entertainment values. The application of technological solutions to memory institutions has failed to express substantive and sustainable results, mostly because of the lack of a self-supporting economic model for the promotion and exploitation of CH through ICT and because of an improper use of innovation, very often deployed in an auto-referential and "technology push" way. The ongoing shift towards a new "cultural economy" based on intangible services and on accessible, on-demand "experiences" places memory institutions in the uncomfortable position of having to compete (in terms of entertainment and experience value) in a new, unusual horizon subject to market forces. This is a particularly severe problem for the multitude of "minor" memory institutions that represent up to 95% of the existing heritage in most European countries.

The project addresses the above scenario by providing:

- dynamic models of territorial CH systems aimed at valorising the qualities and strengths of each regional or local cultural system;

- an innovative solution for collections management and user access in memory institutions based on existing systems developed by two of the partners;

- Territorial Service Centres supporting memory institutions through facilities management, customer relationship management, storage, promotion and transaction services (a new model of cultural Application service Provider (ASP));

- a global "openheritage.com" enterprise for the exploitation of the European CH through an advanced portal specialised in the b2b trading of rich media assets.

Milestones:

The main milestones and expected results are:

M1.1 - Progress Report 1;

M1.2 - Progress Report 2;

M1.3 - Progress Report 3;

M1.4 - Progress report 4 and Final Report;

M1.5 - Consortium and exploitation agreement;

M2.1 - Requirements analysis;

M3.1 - Modelling software prototype;

M3.2 - Collections Management software prototype;

M3.3 - Territorial Service Centre prototypes;

M3.4 - Portal prototype;

M4.1 - Business plan;

M4.2 - Start of the openheritage.com company;

M4.3 - Major dissemination event;

M5.1 - demonstration Report;

M5.2 - Evaluation Report.

Project details

Project Reference: IST-2000-25136 Contract Type: Cost-sharing contracts

Start Date: 2001-01-01         End Date: 2002-12-31

Duration: 24 months   Project Status: Execution

Participants

National Museums of Scotland  UNITED KINGDOM

Museo Locale "Genna Maria"   ITALY

System Simulation Ltd  UNITED KINGDOM

Cultural Heritage on Line          FRANCE

ADIT Association for Documentation and New Information Technologies          RUSSIAN FEDERATION

Chambre de Commerce et Industrie de Lyon    FRANCE

Stichting Museon (Museum voor Het Onderwijs)          NETHERLANDS

Cultural Service Centre Austria AUSTRIA

CIES - Centro di Ingegneria Economica e Sociale         ITALY

Digital Publishing Japan JAPAN

RCN: 54340

Last updated: 2001-11-05

Appendix C

[Note: this to be completed. The real value in this format is that it should show gaps and duplication well . Its terseness is a disadvantage.]

Survey Summary Example: Scholarly Research